Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Missing Student in Aruba; Rumsfeld on Gitmo; Bush Campaigns for Patriot Act

Aired June 09, 2005 - 10:59   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: Let's take a look at what's happening "Now in the News."
President Bush calls on Congress to renew the Patriot Act. He'll make his case in a speech you'll see live this hour. Mr. Bush says the law passed after 9/11 is an important tool in the war on terror. Critics say it undermines freedom and civil liberties.

We're following new developments in the case of an Alabama teenager missing in Aruba. Police this morning arrested three more men in connection with Natalee Holloway's disappearance. They were last seen -- they were the last people seen with Holloway before she vanished. Details in a live report from Aruba just ahead.

Authorities say a fifth person is in custody in the terrorism investigation in Lodi, California. He is the son of a local Muslim leader who was detained earlier. In another development, the FBI has backed off earlier suggestions of a possible plot to attack hospitals and grocery stores.

Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan gives a rather upbeat assessment of the nation's economy. In remarks before Congress last hour, Greenspan said the U.S. economy is on reasonably firm footing with no significant slowdown expected. His remarks suggest the Fed will continue its interest rate hikes.

Let's check the time. 8:00 a.m. in Lodi, California; 10:00 a.m. in Oklahoma City; and 11:00 a.m. in Columbus, Ohio. From CNN Center in Atlanta, good morning. I'm Daryn Kagan.

First up this hour, there are new developments this morning in Aruba. That is where three more men are under arrest in connection with the disappearance of Alabama teenager Natalee Holloway.

Our Karl Penhaul is following the story, joins us now from Palm Beach, Aruba.

KARL PENHAUL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Daryn, those arrests came just before dawn this morning, and police have spent much of the morning searching the properties where those men were arrested in the search for anything that could lead them to clues as to the whereabouts of Natalee Holloway. The three men that have been arrested were the three last seen in Natalee's company on the early morning when she disappeared. Those were the three men that, together with Natalee, drove off in a vehicle from outside the Carlos 'N Charlie's Mexican restaurant. Now, of course, with these latest arrests, it takes to five the number of people detained in the case of the disappearance of Natalee. We, though, talked to the defense attorney for the first two suspects who were arrested over the weekend to ask him if there was any connection between the three arrested today and the other two arrested over on the weekend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS LEJUEZ, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: My client does not know these three men. But I do know, out of the five, that these three men were the three -- the last three to see Natalee Holloway that night, probably the night of her disappearance, when they took her back to her hotel at approximately 2:30 in the morning.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PENHAUL: We're awaiting a press conference later on, possibly around midday or early afternoon, and hope to get some more updates then -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Karl Penhaul, live from Palm Beach, Aruba. Thank you.

President Bush is campaigning for renewal of the Patriot Act. He is set to deliver a speech in just a few minutes. Our Congressional Correspondent Joe Johns is traveling with the president and joins us live from Columbus, Ohio, with a preview.

Joe, good morning.

JOE JOHNS, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Daryn.

The president just got here in Columbus, Ohio, accompanied by the attorney general, Alberto Gonzales. The president appearing in just a little while here at the Ohio Highway Patrol Academy to promote the renewal of 16 provisions of the Patriot Act that are set to expire at the end of the year.

The White House chose this location because it was here in the Columbus area that the case of Iyman Faris played out. He was the truck driver who was arrested and pleaded guilty, accused of assisting al Qaeda, even meeting Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in 2002. The administration says it used provisions of the Patriot Act to follow the truck driver.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: He's an individual that had gone to Afghanistan and met with Osama bin Laden at an al Qaeda training camp and helped terrorists research airplanes and handle case and purchase supplies. And he met with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed back in 2002 and agreed to take part in the al Qaeda plot to destroy a New York City bridge.

After he returned back to the United States, federal investigators used the Patriot Act to follow him. And once he was confronted with the evidence against him, he cooperated and provided valuable information to law enforcement authorities.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JOHNS: Now, review and renewal of some of the provisions of the Patriot Act is, of course, controversial. There are some who say there need to be revisions in order to protect civil liberties. The administration, on the other hand, says stripping any of the provisions of the Patriot Act would make America less safe.

Daryn, back to you.

KAGAN: Joe Johns, live from Columbus, Ohio. Thank you.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld weighing in on the future of the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Human rights activists, some politicians and even a former president have recommended shutting it down.

Our Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr joins us with reaction from Rumsfeld.

Good morning.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Good morning to you, Daryn. Well, in the wake of calls, at least from the news media, from Senator Biden, from Jimmy Carter, former President Carter, the questions do continue to come to administration officials about what to do about Guantanamo Bay.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld earlier this week made it very clear that in his view there is no consideration in the administration for closing down the detention facility on Cuba. But at a press conference in Europe earlier today, he was asked again about that very question. And he offered some more insight into his thinking.

Here's what had he to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD RUMSFELD, DEFENSE SECRETARY: A whole lot of questions come to mind. If you closed it, where would you go?

The -- our desire all along has been to see that people who were involved in the September 11 killing of 3,000 men, women and children, and were captured, engaged in terrorist activities, or captured on battlefields in Afghanistan or Iraq or elsewhere, be kept off the streets so they don't kill more people. Second, it has been an attempt to find out from them information about potential terrorist attacks that might be in the offing. And, in fact, that's happened.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STARR: Now, one of the reasons the secretary of defense was asked about this was yesterday, President Bush was also asked by a reporter for a news organization what his view was on closing down Guantanamo Bay, especially after President Carter spoke on the matter. President Bush getting some attention in those remarks because he said the U.S. was exploring all alternatives, but administration officials behind the scenes are making it very clear that the only alternatives they are really considering is continuing with their ongoing plans to send detainees off the island, back to their home countries for detention or release when that is possible. No consideration being given to shutting gown Guantanamo Bay at this point.

Daryn, there are still 520 detainees on the island, and 234 have actually left the island since the operation began there. And when they talk about leaving the island, what they mean is that alternative, sending them back to their home country for detention if they are still deemed to be a threat, or sending them back to their home country for release -- Daryn.

KAGAN: All right. Barbara Starr at the Pentagon. Thank you.

Authorities are holding a fifth person in an ongoing terror investigation in California. He is the son of a local Muslim leader detained earlier in Lodi, California. That's near Sacramento.

Another father and son are also being held. They're accused of lying about the son attending a terrorist training camp.

Also, the FBI is backing up earlier details about a possible plot to attack grocery stores and hospitals.

To Capitol Hill now, and live pictures for you. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff testifying before a House committee this morning. He's discussing how prepared his department is to respond to terrorism threats facing the nation.

Lawmakers are looking into emergency procedures for the Capitol building. That hearing also taking place. Live pictures for you at this hour. A scare involving a small plane last month led to mass evacuation of the Capitol and the White House.

CNN "Security Watch" keeps you up to date on safety. Stay tuned day and night for the most reliable news about your security.

Well, something wicked threatens. Lots of tornado warnings around Leavenworth County, Texas, yesterday. But it was thunderstorms that delivered the power punch: two inches of rain and 80-mile-an-hour winds that knocked out electricity.

Also, you'll want to keep an eye on the Caribbean, where a tropical depression has grown into the first named storm of the season. Forecasters say Tropical Storm Arlene could reach Cuba by tonight and move into the Gulf of Mexico tomorrow.

(WEATHER REPORT)

KAGAN: We are expecting -- speaking of standing by, we are expecting President Bush to speak in Columbus, Ohio, about 10 minutes from now. He's expected to make his case for the Patriot Act. We will bring you live coverage of the president's speech when it begins. A lot of lawmakers will be paying attention to the president's pitch, including Russ Feingold. The senator has been a vocal critic of the Patriot Act. He will also weigh in later this hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(STOCK MARKET REPORT)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: We are standing by, expecting President Bush to speak in Columbus, Ohio, within the next few minutes. He's going to be talking about the Patriot Act. Portions of the Patriot Act which was signed into law six weeks after September 11 are set to expire at the end of the year. There's a new bill that would renew and expand that act.

With more on the changes that could be ahead, let's bring in Kendall Coffey, former U.S. attorney. We like to talk to him about legal matters.

Kendall, good morning.

KENDALL COFFEY, FMR. U.S. ATTORNEY: Hey. Good morning, Daryn.

KAGAN: So this is looking to -- well, not all the Patriot Act would go away, just some parts of it. What are the parts that are of concern?

COFFEY: Well, I think the parts are of concern that would otherwise sunset deal with increased surveillance powers that were enacted in the wake of the 9/11 terrorism attacks. And there is some concern about some of the provisions in terms of, for example, have we made it easier to go into somebody's home, do a search, not even notify the occupant? That sort of thing is referred to as either delayed notification, or less kindly, as a black bag search. That's going to be one of the things that the congressional critics have had a lot, a lot, to say about.

Other parts of it, Daryn, really are not nearly so drastic. They tend to really modernize, rather than revolutionize, surveillance. For example, extending to e-mail some of the same traditional law enforcement tools that we've been using for decades with respect to telephones.

KAGAN: Well, part of the thing you were talking about, these subpoena powers for the FBI. There would be expanded subpoena powers for the FBI if they suspected acts of terrorism. Supporters say you need to do this to keep the country safe. Critics say we're going to a very dangerous place here in terms of what the government is allowed to do with any kinds of checks and balances.

COFFEY: Yes. But, I mean, I think in fairness to the administration with respect to this, whether or not the FBI issues a particular subpoena, there was the power always to conduct investigations, whether you have a grand jury subpoena, whether in some cases you need a search warrant, which requires a heightened level of proof and a judge to issue it. So in the main, I think what they've tried to do is not say that somebody can wiretap your telephone without probable cause and without a great deal of judicial supervision.

What they've tried to do is make it move faster with removing some logistical impediments so that, for example, the FBI, which is going to be following certain protocols of its own, can get information with a little less of an ordeal, and in some of the other examples of modernizing. It's referred to as a roving wiretap.

All that means is that if there's probable cause in the judicial safeguards to wiretap a phone, you don't have to keep getting a new submission and a new wiretap order each time a suspect switches from one cell phone to another. Again, I call that modernizing, something that makes law enforcement's job easier rather than a drastic intrusion on civil liberties.

KAGAN: Well, let's take a look at -- two pictures we're looking at here. You have Kendall and me on one side of the screen, then you have Alberto Gonzales, the attorney general, at the podium, President Bush obviously to his left. And he'll be speaking in just a few moments.

Kendall, I've got to call you on something here. As I said, you're a former U.S. attorney, former prosecutor, and you're speaking out, saying, well, it wouldn't be so bad to have some of these tools in order to be able to do investigations and prosecute.

COFFEY: You nailed me. I've got to admit. think some of these would help.

I also have confidence, frankly, in the integrity of the -- of the Justice Department and the FBI. That's not necessarily the only guarantee in our system.

So the judges stay just as involved in all the material respects as ever. And I'm certainly a big fan of congressional oversight. But do I think that up to now at least these tools have been used responsibly? That's what the evidence indicates.

KAGAN: All right. Well, thank you. Kendall Coffey, good to see you again.

COFFEY: Thank you.

N KAGAN: And as we see the attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, at the podium, we're going to fit in a quick break here. When the president begins to speak, we'll come back live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: And we go live now to Columbus, Ohio. Here now, President Bush.

(INTERRUPTED BY LIVE EVENT)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Thanks for the warm welcome. It's great to be back in Columbus, Ohio.

I remind people that my grandfather was raised here in Columbus, Ohio. One time I reminded people when I was in Columbus that my grandfather was raised here, my dad's dad, and my mother called me. She said, "Why didn't you tell them my father was raised in Dayton?"

(LAUGHTER)

I said, "From this point forward, I will, Mother."

(LAUGHTER)

My dad's dad was raised in Columbus and my mother's dad was raised in Dayton.

(LAUGHTER)

It's nice to be back.

I want to thank you all for letting me come by the Ohio State Highway Patrol Academy. I appreciate what you do here. I appreciate the hard work that you have put forth in order to train men and women to be on the front line of serving our communities and our country.

I appreciate the fact that these are tough times for those who wear the uniform. But you've got to understand that the men and women who wear the badge of peace, the peacekeepers, the people on the front lines of keeping our communities safe, have got the gratitude of the American people.

On behalf of a grateful nation, thank you for what you do.

(APPLAUSE)

And I appreciate my friend, Attorney General Al Gonzales, joining me today.

Thanks for coming over to introduce me. Get back to work.

(LAUGHTER)

I want to thank Governor Taft for joining us.

Governor, I appreciate you being here.

I want to thank Senator Mike DeWine for joining us today.

Proud you're here, Senator.

Congressman Pat Tiberi. This is his district.

Congressman, I appreciate you coming.

He said, by the way, "Ohio State is in my district." He said, "You tell those Texas Longhorns..."

(LAUGHTER)

I'm not going to tell them what you said.

(LAUGHTER)

I appreciate Congressman Dave Hobson joining us as well.

I want to thank the state attorney general, Jim Petro (ph), for joining us; U.S. attorney, Greg Lockhart (ph). I want to thank Director Ken Morkel (ph) for joining us today.

Thank you, Ken, for being here.

Paul McClellan (ph), state and local officials. Most of all, people who wear the uniform.

I'm proud you're here.

Today, when I landed at the airport, I met Diane Garrett, who's with us today. Diane has been a volunteer with the White Hall Citizens Police Academy Alumni Association for eight years.

She represents thousands of people across our country who are working hand-in-glove with our local law enforcement to make the police stations work better.

She's a part of the citizens corps. She's a part of the emergency response team in the Whitehall community.

The reason I bring up people like Diane is it's important for us to always remember that the great strength of America lies in the hearts and souls of our citizens.

The true strength of this country lies in the hearts of those who are willing to help volunteer to make our communities a more compassionate, decent and safe place.

If you want to serve Ohio, if you want to serve America, help feed the hungry, find shelter for the homeless, volunteer to help our law enforcement do their job, love a neighbor just like you like to be loved yourself -- and you're making a big contribution to America.

Diane, thank you for coming.

(APPLAUSE)

Go ahead and stand up.

(APPLAUSE)

My most solemn duty as the president is to protect the American people, and I'm honored to share that responsibility with you. We have a joint responsibility.

As sworn officers of the law, you're devoted to defending your fellow citizens. Your vigilance is keeping our community safe. And you're serving on the front lines of the war on terror.

It's a different kind of war than a war our nation was used to. You know firsthand the nature of the enemy. We face brutal men who celebrate murder, incite suicide and who will stop at nothing to destroy the liberties we cherish.

You know that these enemies cannot be deterred by negotiations or concessions or appeals to reason.

In this war there's only one option, and that option is victory.

Since September the 11th, 2001, we have gone on the offensive against the terrorists. We have dealt the enemy a series of powerful blows.

The terrorists are on the run, and we'll keep them on the run. Yet they're still active. They're still seeking to do us harm.

The terrorists are patient and determined, and so are we. They're hoping we'll get complacent and forget our responsibilities.

Once again, they're proving that they don't understand our nation. The United States of America will never let down its guard.

This is a long war, and we have a comprehensive strategy to win it. We're taking the fight to the terrorists abroad so we don't have to face them here at home.

We're denying our enemies sanctuary by making it clear that America will not tolerate regimes that harbor or support terrorists.

We're stopping the terrorists from achieving ideological victories they seek by spreading hope and freedom and reform across the broader Middle East. By advancing the cause of liberty, we'll lay the foundations for peace for generations to come.

And one of the great honors as the president is to be the commander in chief of a fantastic United States military, made fantastic by the quality and the character of the men and women who wear the uniform.

Thank you for serving.

(APPLAUSE)

As we wage the war on terror overseas, we'll remember where the war began: right here on American soil.

In our free and open society, there is no such thing as perfect security. To protect our country, we have to be right 100 percent of the time; to hurt us, the terrorists have to be right only once.

So we're working to answer that challenge every day and we're making good progress toward securing the homeland.

We've enhanced security at coastlines and borders and ports of entry, and we have more work to do. We've strengthened protections at our airports and chemical plants and highways and bridges and tunnels, and we've got more work to do.

We made terrorism the top priority for law enforcement, and we provided unprecedented resources to help folks like yourself do their jobs.

Since 2001, we've more than tripled spending on homeland security and we've increased funding more than tenfold for the first responders who protect our homeland.

Law enforcement officers stand between our people and great dangers, and we're making sure you have the tools necessary to do your job.

We've also improved our ability to track terrorists inside the United States. A vital part of that effort is called the USA Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act closed dangerous gaps in America's law enforcements and intelligence capabilities, gaps the terrorists exploited when they attacked us on September the 11th.

Both houses of Congress passed the Patriot Act by overwhelming bipartisan majority, 98 out of 100 United States senators voted for the act. That's what we call bipartisanship.

The Patriot Act was the clear, considered response of a nation at war, and I was proud to sign that piece of legislation.

Over the past three and a half years, America's law enforcement and intelligence personnel have proved that the Patriot Act works; that it was an important piece of legislation.

Since September the 11th, federal terrorism investigations have resulted in charges against more than 400 suspects. And more than half of those charged had been convicted.

Federal, state and local law enforcement had used the Patriot Act to break up terror cells in New York and Oregon and Virginia and in Florida. We prosecuted terrorists operatives and supporters in California, in Texas, in New Jersey, in Illinois and North Carolina and Ohio.

These efforts have not always made the headlines, but they've made communities safer.

The Patriot Act has accomplished exactly what it was designed to do: It has protected American liberty and saved American lives.

The problem is at the end of this year 16 critical provisions of the Patriot Act are scheduled to expire. Some people call these sunset provisions. That's a good name, because letting those provisions expire would leave law enforcement in the dark.

All 16 provisions are practical, important and they're constitutional. Congress needs to renew them all. And this time, Congress needs to make the provisions permanent.

(APPLAUSE)

We need to renew the Patriot Act because it strengthens our national security in four important ways.

First, we need to renew the critical provisions of the Patriot Act that authorize better sharing of information between law enforcement and intelligence.

Before the Patriot Act, criminal investigators were separated from intelligence officers by a legal and bureaucratic wall.

A federal prosecutor who investigated Osama bin Laden in the 1990s explained the challenge this way: "We could talk to citizens, local police officers, foreign police officers. We could even talk to Al Qaida members. But there was one group of people we were not permitted to talk to: the FBI agents across the street from us assigned to parallel intelligence investigations of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaida." That was a wall.

Finding our enemies in the war on terror is tough enough. Law enforcement officers should not be denied vital information their own colleagues already have.

The Patriot Act helped tear down this wall, and now law enforcement and intelligence officers are sharing information and working together and bringing terrorists to justice.

In many terrorism cases, information sharing has made the difference between success and failure. And you have an example right here in Columbus, Ohio.

Two years ago a truck driver was charged with providing support to Al Qaida. The capture came after an investigation that relied on the Patriot Act and on contributions from more than a dozen agencies in the Southern Ohio Joint Terrorism Task Force.

And members of that task force are with us today.

I want to thank you for your contribution to the safety of America. And you'll understand the story I'm about to tell.

For several years, Iyman Faris posed as a law-abiding resident of Columbus. But in 2000, he traveled to Afghanistan and met Osama bin Laden at an Al Qaida training camp. Faris helped the terrorists research airplanes and handle cash and purchase supplies.

In 2002, he met Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the September the 11th attacks. And he agreed to take part in an Al Qaida plot to destroy a New York City bridge.

After Faris returned to the United States, federal investigators used the Patriot Act to follow his trail.

They used new information-sharing provisions to piece together details about his time in Afghanistan and his plan to launch an attack on the United States.

They used the Patriot Act to discover that Faris had cased possible targets in New York and that he had reported his findings to Al Qaida.

In spring of 2003, the FBI confronted Faris, presented the case they had built against him. The case against him was so strong that Faris chose to cooperate, and he spent the next several weeks telling authorities about his Al Qaida association.

Faris pled guilty to the charges against him. And today, instead of planning terror attacks against the American people, Iyman Faris is sitting in an American prison.

The agents and prosecutors who used the Patriot Act to put Faris behind bars did superb work, and they know what a difference information sharing made.

Here's what one FBI agent said. He said: "The Faris case would not have happened without sharing information. That information sharing was made possible by the Patriot Act."

Another investigator on the case said: "We never would have had the lead to begin with."

You proved that good team work is critical in protecting America. For the sake of our national security, Congress must not rebuild a wall between law enforcement and intelligence.

Second, we need to renew the critical provisions of the Patriot Act that allow investigators to use the same tools against terrorists that they already use against other criminals.

Before the Patriot Act, it was easier to track the phone contacts of a drug dealer than the phone contacts of an enemy operative.

Before the Patriot Act, it was easier to get the credit card receipts of a tax cheat than an Al Qaida bankroller.

Before the Patriot Act, agents could use wiretaps to investigate a person committing mail fraud but not to investigate a foreign terrorist.

The Patriot Act corrected all these pointless double standards. And America is safer as a result.

One tool that has been especially important to law enforcement is called a roving wiretap. Roving wiretaps allow investigators to follow suspects who frequently change their means of communications. These wiretaps must be approved by a judge, and they have been used for years to catch drug dealers and other criminals.

Yet before the Patriot Act, agents investigating terrorists had to get a separate authorization for each phone they wanted to tap. That means terrorists could elude law enforcement by simply purchasing a new cell phone. The Patriot Act fixed the problem by allowing terrorism investigators to use the same wiretaps that were already being used against drug kingpins and mob bosses.

The theory here is straightforward: If we have good tools to fight street crime and fraud, law enforcement should have the same tools to fight terrorism.

Third, we need to renew the critical provisions of the Patriot Act that updated the law to meet high-tech threats like computer espionage and cyberterrorism.

Before the Patriot Act, Internet providers who notified federal authorities about threatening e-mails ran the risk of getting sued.

The Patriot Act modernized the law to protect Internet companies who voluntarily disclose information to save lives. Common-sense reform and it's delivered results.

In April of 2004, a man sent an e-mail to an Islamic center in El Paso and threatened to burn the mosque to the ground in three days. Before the Patriot Act, the FBI could have spent a week or more waiting for the information they needed.

Thanks to the Patriot Act, an Internet provider was able to provide the information quickly, without fear of a lawsuit. And the FBI arrested the man before he could fulfill his threat.

Terrorists are using every advantage they can to inflict harm. Terrorists are using every advantage of 21st-century technology. And Congress needs to ensure that our law enforcement can use that same advantage as well.

Finally, we need to renew the critical provisions of the Patriot Act that protect our civil liberties.

The Patriot Act was written with clear safeguards to ensure the law is applied fairly.

The judicial branch has a strong oversight role. Law enforcement officers need a federal judge's permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist's phone, federal judge's permission to track his calls or federal judge's permission to search his property.

Officers must meet strict standards to use any of these tools. And these standards are fully consistent with the Constitution of the United States.

Congress also oversees the application of the Patriot Act. Congress has recently created a federal board to ensure that the Patriot Act and other laws respect privacy and civil liberties. And I'll soon name five talented Americans to serve on that board.

Attorney General Gonzales delivers regular reports on the Patriot Act to the House and the Senate, and the Department of Justice has answered hundreds of questions from members of Congress. When Senator Dianne Feinstein of California has worked with civil rights groups to monitor my administration's use of the Patriot Act, here's what she said: "We've scrubbed the area and I have no reported abuses."

Remember that the next time you hear someone make an unfair criticism of this important good law.

The Patriot Act has not diminished American liberties. The Patriot Act has helped to defend American liberties.

Every day, the men and women of law enforcement use the Patriot Act to keep America safe. It's the nature of your job that many of your most important achievements must remain secret.

Americans will always be grateful for the risks you take and for the determination you bring to this high calling.

You have done your job. Now those of us in Washington have to do our job.

The House and Senate are moving forward with the process to renew the Patriot Act. My message to Congress is clear: The terrorist threats against us will not expire at the end of the year, and neither should the protections of the Patriot Act.

I want to thank you for letting me come and talk about this important piece of legislation. I want to thank you for being on the front lines of securing this country.

May God bless you and your families and may God continue to bless our nation.

Thank you very much.

(APPLAUSE)

KAGAN: We've been listening in to President Bush. He's speaking in Columbus, Ohio toady about the Patriot Act, brought into law three- and-half years ago, just about six weeks after the 9/11 attacks. There are 16 provisions in the Patriot Act that are set to expire at the end of the year. There's a move in Congress to not only keep those going, but expand some of those provisions in the Patriot Act.

The president saying that the Patriot Act was a clear and considered response to a nation at war, and that it worked, and he says it doesn't limit American liberties, it defends American liberties. There are other opinions, obviously about this, throughout the country.

In 2001, Democratic Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin cast the lone voice against the Patriot Act.

He's joining me live from Capitol Hill to talk about that and where it goes from here.

Senator, good morning.

SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD (D), WISCONSIN: Good morning. Good morning.

KAGAN: Good to have you here with us. I'm sure had you a chance to listen in to the president as he was speaking.

FEINGOLD: I did, yes.

KAGAN: You have a different opinion about where those 16 provisions of the Patriot Act should go.

FEINGOLD: Well, you know, the president was talking about the very important fight against terrorism and about the provisions of the Patriot Act that we all agree on, for example, getting the wall down between the CIA and the FBI, but frankly, it was just deceptive. What the president was doing was talking about provisions that nobody objects to. His example in Columbus had absolutely nothing to do with the provisions that need to be changed, such as the provisions allowing people to get the library records of people that have done absolutely nothing wrong. Such as the provision that allow a sneak- and-peek search of your house that can be indefinite in time without any limitations.

So the president basically was doing a bait and switch, and this is what the administration has done all along. They talk about the provisions that we're all fine with to justify their argument, and then they try to defend the other provisions that have problems in them by saying that somehow that relates to the issue before us. So the truth is, the provisions need to be changed. It's a great threat there to the liberties of Americans, and the president and the administration refuse to tell the truth about the USA Patriot Act.

KAGAN: As a general way to describe it, the president was saying, he just thinks that prosecutors and investigators should have the same tools in going after terrorists as they have in going after other potential criminals, like drug dealers and other people who intend to do harm.

FEINGOLD: Well ,of course, they do. And of course, that isn't an accurate statement. The president's got, the entire administration has an entire attitude of, don't bother me with the facts. With the USA Patriot Act, it takes away the judge's role entirely. In a situation where, for example, you're asking for somebody's library records. The judge doesn't have any right to say no. The FBI can just say, look, we want these records, and the judge has to give it to them.

And even Mr. Gonzales, the attorney general who introduced the president today, has admitted before the Judiciary Committee that there's something wrong with that. And yet they're in this attitude that you shouldn't change one word of the Patriot Act.

I'll tell you, this is the way that the freedoms of Americans are taken away. This is what happens in times of war. When dramatic incidents are used that have nothing to do with the facts or the problems before us to justify extreme actions. And now the Intelligence Committee wants to make it even worse. They want to have administrative subpoenas that won't have a judge say yes or no to an administrative subpoena.

And I can tell you this, this is a drastic threat to the freedoms of all Americans. It is completely unnecessary. None of us are radicating the repeal of any of the provisions. We favor the continuation of all 16 provisions; we just want to fix them. So the president's speech basically had nothing to do with the issue before us, which is that the USA Patriot Act has to be fixed.

KAGAN: You talked about the Senate intelligence Committee and what they did. That still has to go through the Judiciary Committee. where you sit. Do you plan to try to make amendments to that bill at that time?

FEINGOLD: Absolutely. First the chairman, Senator Specter, has done a wonderful job about raising questions about the Patriot Act. He doesn't agree with the president that it should be left exactly the same. He is going to have to ask that it come through the Judiciary Committee. I'm hopeful that he will do that, and that's where it should really be.

The idea that a balancing of our freedoms and our need to fight terrorism and our law would be done only in the Intelligence Committee and not in front of the Judiciary Committee is another example of how our freedoms are going to be taken away if we buy the phony arguments that are being put forward in favor of a number of these provisions of the Patriot Act that were hastily drafted. And just about everybody that really looks at them, goes, wait a minute, of course a judge should have to be able to say yes or no.

Of course a person should be able to challenge these provisions. These are terrible provisions. They need to be changed. And I think the president is absolutely wrong on his willingness and desire to have the USA Patriot Act re-enacted with not changing a single word. That's unfair to Americans, and that's an attack on the Bill of Rights.

KAGAN: And when I introduced you, I pointed out you were the only senator back in 2001 that voted against the Patriot Act. It sounds like You definitely stand by that vote. It has been, at least here in the U.S., a relatively safe three-and-a-half years since then in terms of terrorism. Do you think you have gained company, or are you still a lone voice there in the Senate?

FEINGOLD: Clearly I've gained tons of -- I've gained all kinds of company. The Safe Act, which is the bill that the president wouldn't like, is led by Republican Senator Larry Craig, John Sununu, myself and others. It's a bipartisan bill. So there's a -- last session there were some 20 senators saying the president was wrong, that we need to change these provisions, that they have to be fixed. So not only am I not alone, I think we may even have a majority in the House on some of these provisions.

The president is moving in the wrong direction. He apparently doesn't understand the need to balance our rights with the need to fight terrorism. We need to do both, not just have law enforcement be able to do whatever they want without a judge reviewing what's going on. That's absolutely essential to our system of government and to our freedoms.

KAGAN: And as we said, there are other voices out there. And we wanted to make time for that, as well. Senator Feingold, thank you for your time this morning.

FEINGOLD: Thanks so much.

KAGAN: Appreciate that.

And we're going to take a break. A lot more news to get to in the next ten minutes. I'm back after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: A lot going on Capitol Hill today, including a visit from Democratic party boss Howard Dean. He has been in the news a lot lately for some controversial comments he's made, especially about Republicans and the Republican party. These pictures showing him meeting with congressional leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. Howard Dean asked about some of controversial comments he's made recently, including where he called Republicans pretty much a white Christian party. Let's listen to former Governor Dean.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOWARD DEAN, DNC CHAIRMAN: You know, I think a lot of this is exactly what the Republicans want and that's a diversion. The truth is that we need to focus on exactly the issues that Harry Reid just talked about and we're going to. We hardly had any discussion about what's going on in the media circus and all that stuff in the last two weeks.

What we're focussed on is how to have a decent Social Security system, how to have a strong national defense, how to have jobs in America again, how to deal with incredibly high gas prices and get a decent energy bill which actually will do something about gas prices. That's what our agenda is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: By the way, this was not a meeting that was called because of all the attention on Dean's recent remarks. This is a monthly meeting, the Democrats say, that they have with Dean, the head of the party, the party boss, and the Capitol Hill leaders.

Moving to California now. Day five of jury deliberations set to start right now in the Michael Jackson trial. That is behind closed doors. The latest drama, though, taking place on the front steps of the courthouse.

Rusty Dornin is on Jackson jury watch in Santa Maria. Rusty, good morning. RUSTY DORNIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Daryn, another day, another drama at the Santa Maria Courthouse. The latest involves, of course, Michael Jackson's latest visit to the hospital and a flap developing within the Jackson camp.

Late yesterday afternoon, Jackson did go to the hospital again, complaining of back pain. This, of course, is his fifth visit to the hospital since the trial began. Four of those visits involved problems from his back.

Now, before Jackson did go to the hospital, his attorney, Thomas Mesereau, made a visit out to Neverland. That followed a statement that he issued here on their Web site and here at the courthouse saying that does he not authorize anyone to speak on behalf of Jackson or to hold any press conferences.

Now, this statement was prompted -- let's let that siren go by there. This statement was prompted by a series of press conferences and statements made by Jesse Jackson and Jackson's representative, Raymone Bain over the last few days. Now, Raymone Bain had even given a press conference earlier yesterday. It was directly following that press conference where she said she had Mesereau's permission to speak on Jackson's behalf, that Mesereau issued that statement.

Now Bain has told CNN and other reporters that she does not believe that Mesereau's sort of ban on allowing people to speak on behalf of Jackson applies to her. So it's very interesting. Also, Reverend Jesse Jackson's also saying the same thing. He doesn't believe his public comments, you know, violated anything to do with Mesereau, that he was being allowed to speak.

Meantime, the jury arrived here about an hour ago. They began debilitating about a half hour ago. It's going to be a short day today. They'll only going to be going to 11:00 a.m. local time, because apparently a few of them have some graduation ceremonies they're going to be going to. So short day today. They'll be back again, 8:30 tomorrow, of course, if they don't reach a verdict this morning -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Life intervenes. Thank you so much. Rusty Dornin, live from Santa Maria, California.

(STOCK MARKET REPORT)

KAGAN: And that's going to do it for me. I'm Daryn Kagan. I'm actually off tomorrow, taking a long weekend, but I'll see you right back here on Monday morning. International news is up next. Stay tuned for "YOUR WORLD TODAY." Jim Clancy and Zain Verjee, joining you after a quick break. Have a great day.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com


Aired June 9, 2005 - 10:59   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
DARYN KAGAN, CNN ANCHOR: Let's take a look at what's happening "Now in the News."
President Bush calls on Congress to renew the Patriot Act. He'll make his case in a speech you'll see live this hour. Mr. Bush says the law passed after 9/11 is an important tool in the war on terror. Critics say it undermines freedom and civil liberties.

We're following new developments in the case of an Alabama teenager missing in Aruba. Police this morning arrested three more men in connection with Natalee Holloway's disappearance. They were last seen -- they were the last people seen with Holloway before she vanished. Details in a live report from Aruba just ahead.

Authorities say a fifth person is in custody in the terrorism investigation in Lodi, California. He is the son of a local Muslim leader who was detained earlier. In another development, the FBI has backed off earlier suggestions of a possible plot to attack hospitals and grocery stores.

Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan gives a rather upbeat assessment of the nation's economy. In remarks before Congress last hour, Greenspan said the U.S. economy is on reasonably firm footing with no significant slowdown expected. His remarks suggest the Fed will continue its interest rate hikes.

Let's check the time. 8:00 a.m. in Lodi, California; 10:00 a.m. in Oklahoma City; and 11:00 a.m. in Columbus, Ohio. From CNN Center in Atlanta, good morning. I'm Daryn Kagan.

First up this hour, there are new developments this morning in Aruba. That is where three more men are under arrest in connection with the disappearance of Alabama teenager Natalee Holloway.

Our Karl Penhaul is following the story, joins us now from Palm Beach, Aruba.

KARL PENHAUL, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Daryn, those arrests came just before dawn this morning, and police have spent much of the morning searching the properties where those men were arrested in the search for anything that could lead them to clues as to the whereabouts of Natalee Holloway. The three men that have been arrested were the three last seen in Natalee's company on the early morning when she disappeared. Those were the three men that, together with Natalee, drove off in a vehicle from outside the Carlos 'N Charlie's Mexican restaurant. Now, of course, with these latest arrests, it takes to five the number of people detained in the case of the disappearance of Natalee. We, though, talked to the defense attorney for the first two suspects who were arrested over the weekend to ask him if there was any connection between the three arrested today and the other two arrested over on the weekend.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

CHRIS LEJUEZ, DEFENSE ATTORNEY: My client does not know these three men. But I do know, out of the five, that these three men were the three -- the last three to see Natalee Holloway that night, probably the night of her disappearance, when they took her back to her hotel at approximately 2:30 in the morning.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

PENHAUL: We're awaiting a press conference later on, possibly around midday or early afternoon, and hope to get some more updates then -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Karl Penhaul, live from Palm Beach, Aruba. Thank you.

President Bush is campaigning for renewal of the Patriot Act. He is set to deliver a speech in just a few minutes. Our Congressional Correspondent Joe Johns is traveling with the president and joins us live from Columbus, Ohio, with a preview.

Joe, good morning.

JOE JOHNS, CNN CONGRESSIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Good morning, Daryn.

The president just got here in Columbus, Ohio, accompanied by the attorney general, Alberto Gonzales. The president appearing in just a little while here at the Ohio Highway Patrol Academy to promote the renewal of 16 provisions of the Patriot Act that are set to expire at the end of the year.

The White House chose this location because it was here in the Columbus area that the case of Iyman Faris played out. He was the truck driver who was arrested and pleaded guilty, accused of assisting al Qaeda, even meeting Khalid Sheikh Mohammed in 2002. The administration says it used provisions of the Patriot Act to follow the truck driver.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

SCOTT MCCLELLAN, WHITE HOUSE PRESS SECRETARY: He's an individual that had gone to Afghanistan and met with Osama bin Laden at an al Qaeda training camp and helped terrorists research airplanes and handle case and purchase supplies. And he met with Khalid Sheikh Mohammed back in 2002 and agreed to take part in the al Qaeda plot to destroy a New York City bridge.

After he returned back to the United States, federal investigators used the Patriot Act to follow him. And once he was confronted with the evidence against him, he cooperated and provided valuable information to law enforcement authorities.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

JOHNS: Now, review and renewal of some of the provisions of the Patriot Act is, of course, controversial. There are some who say there need to be revisions in order to protect civil liberties. The administration, on the other hand, says stripping any of the provisions of the Patriot Act would make America less safe.

Daryn, back to you.

KAGAN: Joe Johns, live from Columbus, Ohio. Thank you.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld weighing in on the future of the U.S. prison at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba. Human rights activists, some politicians and even a former president have recommended shutting it down.

Our Pentagon Correspondent Barbara Starr joins us with reaction from Rumsfeld.

Good morning.

BARBARA STARR, CNN PENTAGON CORRESPONDENT: Good morning to you, Daryn. Well, in the wake of calls, at least from the news media, from Senator Biden, from Jimmy Carter, former President Carter, the questions do continue to come to administration officials about what to do about Guantanamo Bay.

Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld earlier this week made it very clear that in his view there is no consideration in the administration for closing down the detention facility on Cuba. But at a press conference in Europe earlier today, he was asked again about that very question. And he offered some more insight into his thinking.

Here's what had he to say.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

DONALD RUMSFELD, DEFENSE SECRETARY: A whole lot of questions come to mind. If you closed it, where would you go?

The -- our desire all along has been to see that people who were involved in the September 11 killing of 3,000 men, women and children, and were captured, engaged in terrorist activities, or captured on battlefields in Afghanistan or Iraq or elsewhere, be kept off the streets so they don't kill more people. Second, it has been an attempt to find out from them information about potential terrorist attacks that might be in the offing. And, in fact, that's happened.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

STARR: Now, one of the reasons the secretary of defense was asked about this was yesterday, President Bush was also asked by a reporter for a news organization what his view was on closing down Guantanamo Bay, especially after President Carter spoke on the matter. President Bush getting some attention in those remarks because he said the U.S. was exploring all alternatives, but administration officials behind the scenes are making it very clear that the only alternatives they are really considering is continuing with their ongoing plans to send detainees off the island, back to their home countries for detention or release when that is possible. No consideration being given to shutting gown Guantanamo Bay at this point.

Daryn, there are still 520 detainees on the island, and 234 have actually left the island since the operation began there. And when they talk about leaving the island, what they mean is that alternative, sending them back to their home country for detention if they are still deemed to be a threat, or sending them back to their home country for release -- Daryn.

KAGAN: All right. Barbara Starr at the Pentagon. Thank you.

Authorities are holding a fifth person in an ongoing terror investigation in California. He is the son of a local Muslim leader detained earlier in Lodi, California. That's near Sacramento.

Another father and son are also being held. They're accused of lying about the son attending a terrorist training camp.

Also, the FBI is backing up earlier details about a possible plot to attack grocery stores and hospitals.

To Capitol Hill now, and live pictures for you. Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff testifying before a House committee this morning. He's discussing how prepared his department is to respond to terrorism threats facing the nation.

Lawmakers are looking into emergency procedures for the Capitol building. That hearing also taking place. Live pictures for you at this hour. A scare involving a small plane last month led to mass evacuation of the Capitol and the White House.

CNN "Security Watch" keeps you up to date on safety. Stay tuned day and night for the most reliable news about your security.

Well, something wicked threatens. Lots of tornado warnings around Leavenworth County, Texas, yesterday. But it was thunderstorms that delivered the power punch: two inches of rain and 80-mile-an-hour winds that knocked out electricity.

Also, you'll want to keep an eye on the Caribbean, where a tropical depression has grown into the first named storm of the season. Forecasters say Tropical Storm Arlene could reach Cuba by tonight and move into the Gulf of Mexico tomorrow.

(WEATHER REPORT)

KAGAN: We are expecting -- speaking of standing by, we are expecting President Bush to speak in Columbus, Ohio, about 10 minutes from now. He's expected to make his case for the Patriot Act. We will bring you live coverage of the president's speech when it begins. A lot of lawmakers will be paying attention to the president's pitch, including Russ Feingold. The senator has been a vocal critic of the Patriot Act. He will also weigh in later this hour.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

(STOCK MARKET REPORT)

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: We are standing by, expecting President Bush to speak in Columbus, Ohio, within the next few minutes. He's going to be talking about the Patriot Act. Portions of the Patriot Act which was signed into law six weeks after September 11 are set to expire at the end of the year. There's a new bill that would renew and expand that act.

With more on the changes that could be ahead, let's bring in Kendall Coffey, former U.S. attorney. We like to talk to him about legal matters.

Kendall, good morning.

KENDALL COFFEY, FMR. U.S. ATTORNEY: Hey. Good morning, Daryn.

KAGAN: So this is looking to -- well, not all the Patriot Act would go away, just some parts of it. What are the parts that are of concern?

COFFEY: Well, I think the parts are of concern that would otherwise sunset deal with increased surveillance powers that were enacted in the wake of the 9/11 terrorism attacks. And there is some concern about some of the provisions in terms of, for example, have we made it easier to go into somebody's home, do a search, not even notify the occupant? That sort of thing is referred to as either delayed notification, or less kindly, as a black bag search. That's going to be one of the things that the congressional critics have had a lot, a lot, to say about.

Other parts of it, Daryn, really are not nearly so drastic. They tend to really modernize, rather than revolutionize, surveillance. For example, extending to e-mail some of the same traditional law enforcement tools that we've been using for decades with respect to telephones.

KAGAN: Well, part of the thing you were talking about, these subpoena powers for the FBI. There would be expanded subpoena powers for the FBI if they suspected acts of terrorism. Supporters say you need to do this to keep the country safe. Critics say we're going to a very dangerous place here in terms of what the government is allowed to do with any kinds of checks and balances.

COFFEY: Yes. But, I mean, I think in fairness to the administration with respect to this, whether or not the FBI issues a particular subpoena, there was the power always to conduct investigations, whether you have a grand jury subpoena, whether in some cases you need a search warrant, which requires a heightened level of proof and a judge to issue it. So in the main, I think what they've tried to do is not say that somebody can wiretap your telephone without probable cause and without a great deal of judicial supervision.

What they've tried to do is make it move faster with removing some logistical impediments so that, for example, the FBI, which is going to be following certain protocols of its own, can get information with a little less of an ordeal, and in some of the other examples of modernizing. It's referred to as a roving wiretap.

All that means is that if there's probable cause in the judicial safeguards to wiretap a phone, you don't have to keep getting a new submission and a new wiretap order each time a suspect switches from one cell phone to another. Again, I call that modernizing, something that makes law enforcement's job easier rather than a drastic intrusion on civil liberties.

KAGAN: Well, let's take a look at -- two pictures we're looking at here. You have Kendall and me on one side of the screen, then you have Alberto Gonzales, the attorney general, at the podium, President Bush obviously to his left. And he'll be speaking in just a few moments.

Kendall, I've got to call you on something here. As I said, you're a former U.S. attorney, former prosecutor, and you're speaking out, saying, well, it wouldn't be so bad to have some of these tools in order to be able to do investigations and prosecute.

COFFEY: You nailed me. I've got to admit. think some of these would help.

I also have confidence, frankly, in the integrity of the -- of the Justice Department and the FBI. That's not necessarily the only guarantee in our system.

So the judges stay just as involved in all the material respects as ever. And I'm certainly a big fan of congressional oversight. But do I think that up to now at least these tools have been used responsibly? That's what the evidence indicates.

KAGAN: All right. Well, thank you. Kendall Coffey, good to see you again.

COFFEY: Thank you.

N KAGAN: And as we see the attorney general, Alberto Gonzales, at the podium, we're going to fit in a quick break here. When the president begins to speak, we'll come back live.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: And we go live now to Columbus, Ohio. Here now, President Bush.

(INTERRUPTED BY LIVE EVENT)

GEORGE W. BUSH, PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES: Thanks for the warm welcome. It's great to be back in Columbus, Ohio.

I remind people that my grandfather was raised here in Columbus, Ohio. One time I reminded people when I was in Columbus that my grandfather was raised here, my dad's dad, and my mother called me. She said, "Why didn't you tell them my father was raised in Dayton?"

(LAUGHTER)

I said, "From this point forward, I will, Mother."

(LAUGHTER)

My dad's dad was raised in Columbus and my mother's dad was raised in Dayton.

(LAUGHTER)

It's nice to be back.

I want to thank you all for letting me come by the Ohio State Highway Patrol Academy. I appreciate what you do here. I appreciate the hard work that you have put forth in order to train men and women to be on the front line of serving our communities and our country.

I appreciate the fact that these are tough times for those who wear the uniform. But you've got to understand that the men and women who wear the badge of peace, the peacekeepers, the people on the front lines of keeping our communities safe, have got the gratitude of the American people.

On behalf of a grateful nation, thank you for what you do.

(APPLAUSE)

And I appreciate my friend, Attorney General Al Gonzales, joining me today.

Thanks for coming over to introduce me. Get back to work.

(LAUGHTER)

I want to thank Governor Taft for joining us.

Governor, I appreciate you being here.

I want to thank Senator Mike DeWine for joining us today.

Proud you're here, Senator.

Congressman Pat Tiberi. This is his district.

Congressman, I appreciate you coming.

He said, by the way, "Ohio State is in my district." He said, "You tell those Texas Longhorns..."

(LAUGHTER)

I'm not going to tell them what you said.

(LAUGHTER)

I appreciate Congressman Dave Hobson joining us as well.

I want to thank the state attorney general, Jim Petro (ph), for joining us; U.S. attorney, Greg Lockhart (ph). I want to thank Director Ken Morkel (ph) for joining us today.

Thank you, Ken, for being here.

Paul McClellan (ph), state and local officials. Most of all, people who wear the uniform.

I'm proud you're here.

Today, when I landed at the airport, I met Diane Garrett, who's with us today. Diane has been a volunteer with the White Hall Citizens Police Academy Alumni Association for eight years.

She represents thousands of people across our country who are working hand-in-glove with our local law enforcement to make the police stations work better.

She's a part of the citizens corps. She's a part of the emergency response team in the Whitehall community.

The reason I bring up people like Diane is it's important for us to always remember that the great strength of America lies in the hearts and souls of our citizens.

The true strength of this country lies in the hearts of those who are willing to help volunteer to make our communities a more compassionate, decent and safe place.

If you want to serve Ohio, if you want to serve America, help feed the hungry, find shelter for the homeless, volunteer to help our law enforcement do their job, love a neighbor just like you like to be loved yourself -- and you're making a big contribution to America.

Diane, thank you for coming.

(APPLAUSE)

Go ahead and stand up.

(APPLAUSE)

My most solemn duty as the president is to protect the American people, and I'm honored to share that responsibility with you. We have a joint responsibility.

As sworn officers of the law, you're devoted to defending your fellow citizens. Your vigilance is keeping our community safe. And you're serving on the front lines of the war on terror.

It's a different kind of war than a war our nation was used to. You know firsthand the nature of the enemy. We face brutal men who celebrate murder, incite suicide and who will stop at nothing to destroy the liberties we cherish.

You know that these enemies cannot be deterred by negotiations or concessions or appeals to reason.

In this war there's only one option, and that option is victory.

Since September the 11th, 2001, we have gone on the offensive against the terrorists. We have dealt the enemy a series of powerful blows.

The terrorists are on the run, and we'll keep them on the run. Yet they're still active. They're still seeking to do us harm.

The terrorists are patient and determined, and so are we. They're hoping we'll get complacent and forget our responsibilities.

Once again, they're proving that they don't understand our nation. The United States of America will never let down its guard.

This is a long war, and we have a comprehensive strategy to win it. We're taking the fight to the terrorists abroad so we don't have to face them here at home.

We're denying our enemies sanctuary by making it clear that America will not tolerate regimes that harbor or support terrorists.

We're stopping the terrorists from achieving ideological victories they seek by spreading hope and freedom and reform across the broader Middle East. By advancing the cause of liberty, we'll lay the foundations for peace for generations to come.

And one of the great honors as the president is to be the commander in chief of a fantastic United States military, made fantastic by the quality and the character of the men and women who wear the uniform.

Thank you for serving.

(APPLAUSE)

As we wage the war on terror overseas, we'll remember where the war began: right here on American soil.

In our free and open society, there is no such thing as perfect security. To protect our country, we have to be right 100 percent of the time; to hurt us, the terrorists have to be right only once.

So we're working to answer that challenge every day and we're making good progress toward securing the homeland.

We've enhanced security at coastlines and borders and ports of entry, and we have more work to do. We've strengthened protections at our airports and chemical plants and highways and bridges and tunnels, and we've got more work to do.

We made terrorism the top priority for law enforcement, and we provided unprecedented resources to help folks like yourself do their jobs.

Since 2001, we've more than tripled spending on homeland security and we've increased funding more than tenfold for the first responders who protect our homeland.

Law enforcement officers stand between our people and great dangers, and we're making sure you have the tools necessary to do your job.

We've also improved our ability to track terrorists inside the United States. A vital part of that effort is called the USA Patriot Act.

The Patriot Act closed dangerous gaps in America's law enforcements and intelligence capabilities, gaps the terrorists exploited when they attacked us on September the 11th.

Both houses of Congress passed the Patriot Act by overwhelming bipartisan majority, 98 out of 100 United States senators voted for the act. That's what we call bipartisanship.

The Patriot Act was the clear, considered response of a nation at war, and I was proud to sign that piece of legislation.

Over the past three and a half years, America's law enforcement and intelligence personnel have proved that the Patriot Act works; that it was an important piece of legislation.

Since September the 11th, federal terrorism investigations have resulted in charges against more than 400 suspects. And more than half of those charged had been convicted.

Federal, state and local law enforcement had used the Patriot Act to break up terror cells in New York and Oregon and Virginia and in Florida. We prosecuted terrorists operatives and supporters in California, in Texas, in New Jersey, in Illinois and North Carolina and Ohio.

These efforts have not always made the headlines, but they've made communities safer.

The Patriot Act has accomplished exactly what it was designed to do: It has protected American liberty and saved American lives.

The problem is at the end of this year 16 critical provisions of the Patriot Act are scheduled to expire. Some people call these sunset provisions. That's a good name, because letting those provisions expire would leave law enforcement in the dark.

All 16 provisions are practical, important and they're constitutional. Congress needs to renew them all. And this time, Congress needs to make the provisions permanent.

(APPLAUSE)

We need to renew the Patriot Act because it strengthens our national security in four important ways.

First, we need to renew the critical provisions of the Patriot Act that authorize better sharing of information between law enforcement and intelligence.

Before the Patriot Act, criminal investigators were separated from intelligence officers by a legal and bureaucratic wall.

A federal prosecutor who investigated Osama bin Laden in the 1990s explained the challenge this way: "We could talk to citizens, local police officers, foreign police officers. We could even talk to Al Qaida members. But there was one group of people we were not permitted to talk to: the FBI agents across the street from us assigned to parallel intelligence investigations of Osama bin Laden and Al Qaida." That was a wall.

Finding our enemies in the war on terror is tough enough. Law enforcement officers should not be denied vital information their own colleagues already have.

The Patriot Act helped tear down this wall, and now law enforcement and intelligence officers are sharing information and working together and bringing terrorists to justice.

In many terrorism cases, information sharing has made the difference between success and failure. And you have an example right here in Columbus, Ohio.

Two years ago a truck driver was charged with providing support to Al Qaida. The capture came after an investigation that relied on the Patriot Act and on contributions from more than a dozen agencies in the Southern Ohio Joint Terrorism Task Force.

And members of that task force are with us today.

I want to thank you for your contribution to the safety of America. And you'll understand the story I'm about to tell.

For several years, Iyman Faris posed as a law-abiding resident of Columbus. But in 2000, he traveled to Afghanistan and met Osama bin Laden at an Al Qaida training camp. Faris helped the terrorists research airplanes and handle cash and purchase supplies.

In 2002, he met Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the mastermind of the September the 11th attacks. And he agreed to take part in an Al Qaida plot to destroy a New York City bridge.

After Faris returned to the United States, federal investigators used the Patriot Act to follow his trail.

They used new information-sharing provisions to piece together details about his time in Afghanistan and his plan to launch an attack on the United States.

They used the Patriot Act to discover that Faris had cased possible targets in New York and that he had reported his findings to Al Qaida.

In spring of 2003, the FBI confronted Faris, presented the case they had built against him. The case against him was so strong that Faris chose to cooperate, and he spent the next several weeks telling authorities about his Al Qaida association.

Faris pled guilty to the charges against him. And today, instead of planning terror attacks against the American people, Iyman Faris is sitting in an American prison.

The agents and prosecutors who used the Patriot Act to put Faris behind bars did superb work, and they know what a difference information sharing made.

Here's what one FBI agent said. He said: "The Faris case would not have happened without sharing information. That information sharing was made possible by the Patriot Act."

Another investigator on the case said: "We never would have had the lead to begin with."

You proved that good team work is critical in protecting America. For the sake of our national security, Congress must not rebuild a wall between law enforcement and intelligence.

Second, we need to renew the critical provisions of the Patriot Act that allow investigators to use the same tools against terrorists that they already use against other criminals.

Before the Patriot Act, it was easier to track the phone contacts of a drug dealer than the phone contacts of an enemy operative.

Before the Patriot Act, it was easier to get the credit card receipts of a tax cheat than an Al Qaida bankroller.

Before the Patriot Act, agents could use wiretaps to investigate a person committing mail fraud but not to investigate a foreign terrorist.

The Patriot Act corrected all these pointless double standards. And America is safer as a result.

One tool that has been especially important to law enforcement is called a roving wiretap. Roving wiretaps allow investigators to follow suspects who frequently change their means of communications. These wiretaps must be approved by a judge, and they have been used for years to catch drug dealers and other criminals.

Yet before the Patriot Act, agents investigating terrorists had to get a separate authorization for each phone they wanted to tap. That means terrorists could elude law enforcement by simply purchasing a new cell phone. The Patriot Act fixed the problem by allowing terrorism investigators to use the same wiretaps that were already being used against drug kingpins and mob bosses.

The theory here is straightforward: If we have good tools to fight street crime and fraud, law enforcement should have the same tools to fight terrorism.

Third, we need to renew the critical provisions of the Patriot Act that updated the law to meet high-tech threats like computer espionage and cyberterrorism.

Before the Patriot Act, Internet providers who notified federal authorities about threatening e-mails ran the risk of getting sued.

The Patriot Act modernized the law to protect Internet companies who voluntarily disclose information to save lives. Common-sense reform and it's delivered results.

In April of 2004, a man sent an e-mail to an Islamic center in El Paso and threatened to burn the mosque to the ground in three days. Before the Patriot Act, the FBI could have spent a week or more waiting for the information they needed.

Thanks to the Patriot Act, an Internet provider was able to provide the information quickly, without fear of a lawsuit. And the FBI arrested the man before he could fulfill his threat.

Terrorists are using every advantage they can to inflict harm. Terrorists are using every advantage of 21st-century technology. And Congress needs to ensure that our law enforcement can use that same advantage as well.

Finally, we need to renew the critical provisions of the Patriot Act that protect our civil liberties.

The Patriot Act was written with clear safeguards to ensure the law is applied fairly.

The judicial branch has a strong oversight role. Law enforcement officers need a federal judge's permission to wiretap a foreign terrorist's phone, federal judge's permission to track his calls or federal judge's permission to search his property.

Officers must meet strict standards to use any of these tools. And these standards are fully consistent with the Constitution of the United States.

Congress also oversees the application of the Patriot Act. Congress has recently created a federal board to ensure that the Patriot Act and other laws respect privacy and civil liberties. And I'll soon name five talented Americans to serve on that board.

Attorney General Gonzales delivers regular reports on the Patriot Act to the House and the Senate, and the Department of Justice has answered hundreds of questions from members of Congress. When Senator Dianne Feinstein of California has worked with civil rights groups to monitor my administration's use of the Patriot Act, here's what she said: "We've scrubbed the area and I have no reported abuses."

Remember that the next time you hear someone make an unfair criticism of this important good law.

The Patriot Act has not diminished American liberties. The Patriot Act has helped to defend American liberties.

Every day, the men and women of law enforcement use the Patriot Act to keep America safe. It's the nature of your job that many of your most important achievements must remain secret.

Americans will always be grateful for the risks you take and for the determination you bring to this high calling.

You have done your job. Now those of us in Washington have to do our job.

The House and Senate are moving forward with the process to renew the Patriot Act. My message to Congress is clear: The terrorist threats against us will not expire at the end of the year, and neither should the protections of the Patriot Act.

I want to thank you for letting me come and talk about this important piece of legislation. I want to thank you for being on the front lines of securing this country.

May God bless you and your families and may God continue to bless our nation.

Thank you very much.

(APPLAUSE)

KAGAN: We've been listening in to President Bush. He's speaking in Columbus, Ohio toady about the Patriot Act, brought into law three- and-half years ago, just about six weeks after the 9/11 attacks. There are 16 provisions in the Patriot Act that are set to expire at the end of the year. There's a move in Congress to not only keep those going, but expand some of those provisions in the Patriot Act.

The president saying that the Patriot Act was a clear and considered response to a nation at war, and that it worked, and he says it doesn't limit American liberties, it defends American liberties. There are other opinions, obviously about this, throughout the country.

In 2001, Democratic Senator Russ Feingold of Wisconsin cast the lone voice against the Patriot Act.

He's joining me live from Capitol Hill to talk about that and where it goes from here.

Senator, good morning.

SEN. RUSS FEINGOLD (D), WISCONSIN: Good morning. Good morning.

KAGAN: Good to have you here with us. I'm sure had you a chance to listen in to the president as he was speaking.

FEINGOLD: I did, yes.

KAGAN: You have a different opinion about where those 16 provisions of the Patriot Act should go.

FEINGOLD: Well, you know, the president was talking about the very important fight against terrorism and about the provisions of the Patriot Act that we all agree on, for example, getting the wall down between the CIA and the FBI, but frankly, it was just deceptive. What the president was doing was talking about provisions that nobody objects to. His example in Columbus had absolutely nothing to do with the provisions that need to be changed, such as the provisions allowing people to get the library records of people that have done absolutely nothing wrong. Such as the provision that allow a sneak- and-peek search of your house that can be indefinite in time without any limitations.

So the president basically was doing a bait and switch, and this is what the administration has done all along. They talk about the provisions that we're all fine with to justify their argument, and then they try to defend the other provisions that have problems in them by saying that somehow that relates to the issue before us. So the truth is, the provisions need to be changed. It's a great threat there to the liberties of Americans, and the president and the administration refuse to tell the truth about the USA Patriot Act.

KAGAN: As a general way to describe it, the president was saying, he just thinks that prosecutors and investigators should have the same tools in going after terrorists as they have in going after other potential criminals, like drug dealers and other people who intend to do harm.

FEINGOLD: Well ,of course, they do. And of course, that isn't an accurate statement. The president's got, the entire administration has an entire attitude of, don't bother me with the facts. With the USA Patriot Act, it takes away the judge's role entirely. In a situation where, for example, you're asking for somebody's library records. The judge doesn't have any right to say no. The FBI can just say, look, we want these records, and the judge has to give it to them.

And even Mr. Gonzales, the attorney general who introduced the president today, has admitted before the Judiciary Committee that there's something wrong with that. And yet they're in this attitude that you shouldn't change one word of the Patriot Act.

I'll tell you, this is the way that the freedoms of Americans are taken away. This is what happens in times of war. When dramatic incidents are used that have nothing to do with the facts or the problems before us to justify extreme actions. And now the Intelligence Committee wants to make it even worse. They want to have administrative subpoenas that won't have a judge say yes or no to an administrative subpoena.

And I can tell you this, this is a drastic threat to the freedoms of all Americans. It is completely unnecessary. None of us are radicating the repeal of any of the provisions. We favor the continuation of all 16 provisions; we just want to fix them. So the president's speech basically had nothing to do with the issue before us, which is that the USA Patriot Act has to be fixed.

KAGAN: You talked about the Senate intelligence Committee and what they did. That still has to go through the Judiciary Committee. where you sit. Do you plan to try to make amendments to that bill at that time?

FEINGOLD: Absolutely. First the chairman, Senator Specter, has done a wonderful job about raising questions about the Patriot Act. He doesn't agree with the president that it should be left exactly the same. He is going to have to ask that it come through the Judiciary Committee. I'm hopeful that he will do that, and that's where it should really be.

The idea that a balancing of our freedoms and our need to fight terrorism and our law would be done only in the Intelligence Committee and not in front of the Judiciary Committee is another example of how our freedoms are going to be taken away if we buy the phony arguments that are being put forward in favor of a number of these provisions of the Patriot Act that were hastily drafted. And just about everybody that really looks at them, goes, wait a minute, of course a judge should have to be able to say yes or no.

Of course a person should be able to challenge these provisions. These are terrible provisions. They need to be changed. And I think the president is absolutely wrong on his willingness and desire to have the USA Patriot Act re-enacted with not changing a single word. That's unfair to Americans, and that's an attack on the Bill of Rights.

KAGAN: And when I introduced you, I pointed out you were the only senator back in 2001 that voted against the Patriot Act. It sounds like You definitely stand by that vote. It has been, at least here in the U.S., a relatively safe three-and-a-half years since then in terms of terrorism. Do you think you have gained company, or are you still a lone voice there in the Senate?

FEINGOLD: Clearly I've gained tons of -- I've gained all kinds of company. The Safe Act, which is the bill that the president wouldn't like, is led by Republican Senator Larry Craig, John Sununu, myself and others. It's a bipartisan bill. So there's a -- last session there were some 20 senators saying the president was wrong, that we need to change these provisions, that they have to be fixed. So not only am I not alone, I think we may even have a majority in the House on some of these provisions.

The president is moving in the wrong direction. He apparently doesn't understand the need to balance our rights with the need to fight terrorism. We need to do both, not just have law enforcement be able to do whatever they want without a judge reviewing what's going on. That's absolutely essential to our system of government and to our freedoms.

KAGAN: And as we said, there are other voices out there. And we wanted to make time for that, as well. Senator Feingold, thank you for your time this morning.

FEINGOLD: Thanks so much.

KAGAN: Appreciate that.

And we're going to take a break. A lot more news to get to in the next ten minutes. I'm back after this.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

KAGAN: A lot going on Capitol Hill today, including a visit from Democratic party boss Howard Dean. He has been in the news a lot lately for some controversial comments he's made, especially about Republicans and the Republican party. These pictures showing him meeting with congressional leaders, including Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid. Howard Dean asked about some of controversial comments he's made recently, including where he called Republicans pretty much a white Christian party. Let's listen to former Governor Dean.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

HOWARD DEAN, DNC CHAIRMAN: You know, I think a lot of this is exactly what the Republicans want and that's a diversion. The truth is that we need to focus on exactly the issues that Harry Reid just talked about and we're going to. We hardly had any discussion about what's going on in the media circus and all that stuff in the last two weeks.

What we're focussed on is how to have a decent Social Security system, how to have a strong national defense, how to have jobs in America again, how to deal with incredibly high gas prices and get a decent energy bill which actually will do something about gas prices. That's what our agenda is.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

KAGAN: By the way, this was not a meeting that was called because of all the attention on Dean's recent remarks. This is a monthly meeting, the Democrats say, that they have with Dean, the head of the party, the party boss, and the Capitol Hill leaders.

Moving to California now. Day five of jury deliberations set to start right now in the Michael Jackson trial. That is behind closed doors. The latest drama, though, taking place on the front steps of the courthouse.

Rusty Dornin is on Jackson jury watch in Santa Maria. Rusty, good morning. RUSTY DORNIN, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Well, Daryn, another day, another drama at the Santa Maria Courthouse. The latest involves, of course, Michael Jackson's latest visit to the hospital and a flap developing within the Jackson camp.

Late yesterday afternoon, Jackson did go to the hospital again, complaining of back pain. This, of course, is his fifth visit to the hospital since the trial began. Four of those visits involved problems from his back.

Now, before Jackson did go to the hospital, his attorney, Thomas Mesereau, made a visit out to Neverland. That followed a statement that he issued here on their Web site and here at the courthouse saying that does he not authorize anyone to speak on behalf of Jackson or to hold any press conferences.

Now, this statement was prompted -- let's let that siren go by there. This statement was prompted by a series of press conferences and statements made by Jesse Jackson and Jackson's representative, Raymone Bain over the last few days. Now, Raymone Bain had even given a press conference earlier yesterday. It was directly following that press conference where she said she had Mesereau's permission to speak on Jackson's behalf, that Mesereau issued that statement.

Now Bain has told CNN and other reporters that she does not believe that Mesereau's sort of ban on allowing people to speak on behalf of Jackson applies to her. So it's very interesting. Also, Reverend Jesse Jackson's also saying the same thing. He doesn't believe his public comments, you know, violated anything to do with Mesereau, that he was being allowed to speak.

Meantime, the jury arrived here about an hour ago. They began debilitating about a half hour ago. It's going to be a short day today. They'll only going to be going to 11:00 a.m. local time, because apparently a few of them have some graduation ceremonies they're going to be going to. So short day today. They'll be back again, 8:30 tomorrow, of course, if they don't reach a verdict this morning -- Daryn.

KAGAN: Life intervenes. Thank you so much. Rusty Dornin, live from Santa Maria, California.

(STOCK MARKET REPORT)

KAGAN: And that's going to do it for me. I'm Daryn Kagan. I'm actually off tomorrow, taking a long weekend, but I'll see you right back here on Monday morning. International news is up next. Stay tuned for "YOUR WORLD TODAY." Jim Clancy and Zain Verjee, joining you after a quick break. Have a great day.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com